We have studied the progress in schools in the 20 th century. Accomplishments between 1900 and 1980?

1. EXPANSION OF SYSTEM OF SCHOOLING (K-12) 2. MOVE TOWARD UNIVERSAL ATTENDANCE • Schools provide more services to students in need • Students with special needs have programs and support services • More students attend school • More students graduate from high school • More students attend college • Have made some gains on closing achievement gap (Anderson)

Race to the Top From the Blueprint Full bill yet to pass

Secretary Arne Duncan

Plans to “soften sanctions” • Provide rewards • Raise bar—everyone ready for college • Link merit pay for teachers to test scores • Give teachers more autonomy • Drastic measures for bottom 1% of schools

A NATION AT RISK (1983) Changed views about public schools.

•

Schools are in crisis.

•

Schools have “squandered the gains in student achievement in the wake of the Sputnik challenge (1957)” Advanced math and science to aid national defense.

•

Reagan did not advocate additional funding, just a new commitment to academic excellence.

Neo-Conservative Ideas Berliner and Biddle (137-138) • 1983-2000 Neo-conservative “centrist” thought won out in school reform and become more influential over time.

• 1983 “A Nation at Risk” The main problem was that schools have diverted from their basic missions (low academic standards, poor discipline) and placed too much attention on issues of equity. • Result: Caused a decline in academic achievement, poor discipline, and contributed to economic decline.

What evidence of crisis was used? Lack of increase in national test scores. National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP)

A Nation At Risk 1983 “Our society is being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation and a people.” Schools should change …

• • •

Graduation Requirements Curriculum Content Higher Standards/Expectations States do respond

• • •

More Time-day/Year Improve Teaching Hold Leadership Accountable

http://vimeo.com/9296110 • John Merrow Brief history of school reform: http://learningmatters.tv/blog/on-the-newshour/race-to-the-top-making-history-an-introduction/3410/

Centrist Neo-conservative view reflected a growing emphasis on:

• • •

Higher standards Hold schools accountable Proof based on test scores

Federal Policies 1980-2001 Momentum for greater accountability began in 1983 •

1983 “A Nation at Risk

”--blamed schools for economic woes, pushed for higher standards and encouraged states to hold schools accountable. Declared a crisis in education, but left states in charge.

•

1990s Federal Policies--Bush and Clinton Goals 2000

– Recommended states set higher standards – Federal government recommended some kind of demonstrated measure of “proficiency” (4 th , 8 th , and once in High School) – Left decisions to the states •

2001 NCLB

Mandated tests (3 rd through 8 th grade in reading and math, and once in High School). Federal government set rules that held states and schools responsible for improving test scores.

How did Federal policy incorporate ideas of a free market model for schools?

Promotes idea of the benefits of applying a free market system model for public schools.

1. C ompetition would pressure schools to improve.

–

Schools were called monopolies that had no incentives to perform well.

–

Compare test scores to rank schools.

2. Choice Give parents choices. Supported ideas of choice within districts and privatization of schools.

–

New options discussed were vouchers (small program nationally), private companies running public schools, and charter schools (outside of public control) 3. Proof Must have proof of outcomes (test scores) like outputs in business.

Neo-Conservative Ideas Berliner and Biddle (137-138) • Neo-conservative “centrist” thought won out in school reform. Main approaches to school reform: • Get tough on schools and teachers (stronger certification requirements, basic skills tests for teacher).

• Recommit to academic EXCELLENCE (return to “golden years”).

• Establish a system of accountability based on performance on tests.

• Gradual increase in the Federal role –Top Down Approach. • Mistrust of educators.

What is in a name?

No Child Left Behind

2001 No Child Left Behind Passed by huge bipartisan support. Fit with centrist neoconservative ideas.

It was not connected to just one party.

No Child Left Behind is trying to solve what problems?

1. Lack of progress as seen on national tests results (National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP).

2.

The achievement GAP on tests, differences in test performance for different ethnic groups and low income students. Goals: Raise test scores, give parents choice, insure qualified teachers.

Assessments do provide valuable information for teachers and administrators.

– Schools should know how students are performing – Schools should know how subgroup are performing – Schools should be concerned about students who have traditionally had poor outcomes.

No Child Left Behind States must set standards.

States must test all students in reading and math grades 3-8 and once in high school.

For the first time FEDERAL RULES MANDATES SPECIFIC PROGRESS GOALS

Within a Content Area: Reading and Math Scores- School & District must Meet Adequate Yearly Progress Combines 3 Elements 1. Student Performance— Meet a set pass rate

and All SUBGROUPS must pass

2. Student Participation

95%

3. School Progress over time to 100% pass rate

of all students in grades 3-8 by 2014

100% Pass Rate by 2014 PROGRESS TO 100% IN ILLINOIS

Composite (Group) scores on state tests don’t tell the whole story either (Darling-Hammond, 19)

2003

• Laura 100 • James 90 • Felipe 80 • Kisha • Raul 70 20

2004

90 80 70 65 transfers out

TO PASS AYP All subgroups must meet the standard pass rate.

• Grades 3-8, and once in High School

Subgroups SIZE DIFFERS state-to state: Three years ago Illinois increased subgroups from 40 to 45, groups are: Race/Ethnicity Economic Background English Proficiency Disability (now 3% Alternative Tests)

DIVERSITY PENALTY AYP is determined by making it over all 18 hurdles (9 hurdles for reading and 9 for math) by disaggregation of data.

Reading Composite American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP Math Composite American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP

Diversity Penalty (Darling Hammond, 12)

Diversity Penalty — the more subgroups, the more ways to fail. New York set subgroups at 30 students in the school to be a valid subgroup, Illinois set subgroups at 45.

MANY URBAN SCHOOLS ARE CHALLENGED BY GREATER DIVERSITY IN THEIR STUDENT POPULATION

FEDERAL REGULATIONS CONTAIN STRICT SANCTIONS When schools fail to meet AYP this timeline begins….

When scores are computed, and schools (subgroups) are below standard, then the School Improvement Timeline takes effect Miss AYP Miss AYP Miss AYP School Improvement Yr 1 (CHOICE) Miss AYP School Improvement Yr 2 (TUTOR) (supplemental educational services) Miss AYP Corrective Action Miss AYP Restructure (planning year) Restructure (implement plan)

• Why was such a strict formula of adequate yearly progress (AYP) established in NCLB?

• Neo-conservative perspective believes that this is the only way to achieve results.

Impact of NCLB on state plans for reform in a high stakes environment —Will NCLB mean lower academic standards?

• http://learningmatters.tv/blog/on-the-newshour/no-child-left-behind-part-1-the-race/1341/ • http://learningmatters.tv/blog/on-the-newshour/no-child-left-behind-part-3-teachers-take-on-nclb/1349/

“The Collision of New Standards and Old Inequalities” Professor Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University School of Education

•

Some of the unintended consequences

–

Teach to the test

–

Limited English Proficiency (LEP) groups will never reach 100% (proficient students move out of the group)

–

Students with disabilities are not on grade level but have IEP that reflect “instructional” level

– –

Teachers leave “needs improvement” and “failing” schools The more diverse a school, the more likely to have a subgroup fail to meet the standard “diversity penalty”

– –

Loss of funds to struggling schools $$$ CHOICE Transfer programs need non-failing schools with open slots

– –

States will consider lowering standards Pressures on students will increase the dropout rate